Floor Statements

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, and during that period of time Senators be allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 44, S. 601.

Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum required under rule XXII be waived, and that the cloture vote occur on Monday, May 6, following the disposition of the Marketplace Fairness Act.

I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to executive session to consider nominations 24, 25, 61, and 89.

I ask unanimous consent that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table, there be no intervening action or debate, and that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations, any statements be printed in the Record, and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by me, in consultation with Senator McConnell, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 42; there be 1 hour for debate equally divided in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate proceed to vote with no intervening action or debate on the nomination; that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table, with no intervening action or debate, and no further motions be in order to the nomination; that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the Record, and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to S. 853, introduced earlier today.

Before we hear from my friend from Maine, I appreciate very much her tenacity, her diligence, and that of Senator Rockefeller and others. This is something that has been difficult, but I think it is the right thing to do. Hopefully when we get back, we can have something broader in scope than just this.

Madam President, we were able to accomplish two very important things this week. One is the final passage of the Internet tax issue, but that is because it was a bipartisan issue, and we were able to get this done.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times and passed and that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that if the Senate receives a bill from the House and the text of that bill is identical to S. 853, the bill then be considered read three times and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration en bloc of the following resolutions, which were submitted earlier today: S. Res 118, S. Res. 119, S. Res. 120, S. Res. 121, S. Res. 122, S. Res. 123, S. Res. 124, and S. Res. 125.

Mr. President, this resolution concerns a request for testimony in writing, documents, and representation in a pro se civil action pending in Connecticut federal district court. In this action, the plaintiff claims that a bar mitzvah was held in the Greenwich Town Hall, allegedly in violation of the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Connecticut.

The plaintiff has issued a subpoena to Senator Blumenthal, who attended a Town Hall event preceding the alleged bar mitzvah, and to his office, requesting the production of a deposition by written questions from the Senator and documents. Senator Blumenthal would like to cooperate by providing testimony in writing and relevant documents. The enclosed resolution would authorize the production of written testimony from the Senator and relevant office documents, where appropriate. It would also authorize the Senate Legal Counsel to represent the Senator, his office, and any employee of the Senator's office from whom evidence may be sought in this case.

S. Res. 122

I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid on the table en bloc, with no intervening action or debate.

I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the upcoming recess or adjournment of the Senate, the President of the Senate, the President pro tempore, and the majority and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards, conferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.

I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn and convene for pro forma sessions only, with no business conducted on the following dates and times, and that following each pro forma session the Senate adjourn until the next pro forma session: Friday, April 26 at 11:30 a.m., Tuesday, April 30 at 10 a.m., and Friday, May 3 at 2 p.m.; and that the Senate adjourn on Friday, May 3 until 2 p.m. on Monday, May 6, 2013; that on Monday, following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following any leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business until 5:30 p.m. with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each; further, I ask unanimous consent that the previous order with respect to S. 743 be modified to provide that at 5:30 p.m., the Senate resume consideration of S. 743, all postcloture time be considered expired, and all other provisions remain in effect.

Madam President, I appreciate the Chair's patience.

There will be up to three rollcall votes Monday, May 6: two votes in order to complete the Marketplace Fairness Act and a third vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to WRDA.

I am told we may not have to have that third vote.

If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. President, I appreciate very much the Chaplain's prayer, but I especially want to recognize the last line or two of his prayer today where he indicated that he wanted a special blessing on the Capitol Police. I am happy the Sergeant at Arms was here when that prayer was being given, because the Chaplain is right. Every day the Capitol Police protect us; that is, Senators and staff, but also the millions of visitors who come to this massive complex every year. We see them standing there at guard, watching the doors. We need to do that because a few years ago we had some madman crash through the House side and kill some police officers.

We see that things have gotten more difficult since then. We have people standing with automatic weapons. We have bomb squads. We have dogs that work with us so well. We have people who are on bicycles. But with the appropriations process coming soon,--I hope--we have to make sure we supply the Capitol Police with the tools and materials and equipment they need to continue doing their job.

Is it inconvenient for people coming here, and for us on occasion? The answer is yes. But they are doing that for us, for the people who come to this complex. I want to acknowledge the good Chaplain. I appreciate his remarks on behalf of the people who protect us here every day.

Mr. President, following leader remarks the Senate will be in morning business until 10:30. Republicans will control the first half, the majority the final half. Following morning business, the Senate will proceed to executive session to consider the nomination of Jane Kelly to be United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit and the nomination of Sylvia Burwell to be Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

At noon there will be up to three rollcall votes: confirmation of Kelly and Burwell and adoption of the motion to proceed to the Marketplace Fairness Act.

Mr. President, S. 788 is due for its second reading.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Manchin.) The clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time.

Mr. President, I would object to any further proceedings with respect to this bill at this time.

Mr. President, I had a number of meetings yesterday with Democratic and Republican proponents of the Marketplace Fairness Act. This

is a piece of legislation that is overwhelmingly supported by Democrats and Republicans. I appreciate the remarks of the Presiding Officer yesterday on behalf of this legislation.

Succinctly, what this legislation would do is level the playing field between online sellers and brick-and-mortar retailers. As everyone knows, we have had a lot of problems with the economy. But in Nevada we have been hit very hard. We led the Nation for 20 years with a vibrant economy. In the last 4 or 5 years it has been difficult. We are doing better now but we are not doing great. For lack of a better description, I was going to say it breaks my heart. I am not sure that is proper. But I feel very badly when I drive in Reno or Las Vegas and see these little strip malls with ``for lease'' signs. They would not be for lease if they had the ability to compete with these online sellers.

As indicated yesterday on a number of occasions in presentations I heard made, people come to the retailers who pay money for brick and mortar. They will find a pair of shoes, they will find a coat they like, or whatever else, and they immediately walk out of there and go on line and do not pay the sales tax. That prevents that business from succeeding.

The reason I mention this today, we could finish this legislation today, on Wednesday, and move on to the other bipartisan legislation. We have a small number of Senators who are holding this up, stalling. This has 50 Democratic votes and at least 25 Republican votes. I know many of my Republican colleagues want to attend--and I think that is appropriate; I wish I could--the opening of the Bush Library in Texas. Unfortunately, there are Senators who are playing procedural games that are going to prevent that from happening. I do not say this often. There is no chance they can prevail. We have three States basically holding up this legislation. For people to talk, you are coercing us to do something. We are coercing those States to do nothing. Zero. Nothing. We are just trying to make the playing field level.

So I want everyone to understand, just a handful of Senators is preventing us from doing our work. We are going to finish this legislation this week. I know this sounds like me crying wolf, but this may be the time the wolf is really coming.

We have a bipartisan bill we have to move to next work period. It is the WRDA, Water Resources Development Act, supported by one of the most liberal Members of this Senate, Barbara Boxer, and one of the most conservative Members, Senator Vitter. They have worked out a bill. It has been reported out of their committee. It is on the calendar right now. We are going to move to that.

In addition to that, we have another bipartisan bill in the wings coming out, the agriculture bill. We need to complete those bills next work period, because we have to get to immigration. So everyone understand, this is not crying wolf. We are going to finish this bill.

I spoke yesterday to Senator Enzi who has worked on this bill for 11 years. I spoke to my good friend--and certainly Mike Enzi is my good friend; I do not mean to choose favorites here--Lamar Alexander. They both said we have got to finish this bill this week. We are going to do that. When I have requests from Dick Durbin and my Republican friends to move forward on this bill, we are going to move forward on it. If we have to be here Friday and Saturday, I am telling everybody we are going to finish this bill.

We have a 3-week work period next time. We have to jam in WRDA and hopefully the ag bill so we can move before July 4 and finish the immigration bill which is going to take up quite a bit of time. We have too much to do when we return from our in-State work period.

I have a lot to do. I have a conference. I am going to do some things there with Eric Cantor. We do not do things together very often, but we are going to talk about some issues people want to talk about. I want to be able to do that. It is not here in Washington. If I have to put that off, it would be a shame for me and Eric Cantor, and I think the people putting on the conference. But if that is what it takes, that is what it takes. I want to go home. So we are going to finish this bill.

I am going to read an editorial from one of the world's leading newspapers. It says, ``Budget Cuts, Minus the Inconvenience.'' Headline: Republicans encourage a sequester affecting the poor, but they are furious about travel delays.

Here is what it says. I am not editorializing, I am just telling you what they put in this newspaper editorial today.

On Monday, after the sequester cuts forced the Federal

Aviation Administration to begin furloughs for air traffic

controllers, delays began to build up at airports around the

country. Travelers had to wait, but nothing delayed

Republicans from scurrying away from all responsibility.

Speaker John Boehner started using the Twitter hashtag

#ObamaFlightDelays, the latest effort in his party's campaign

to blame all the pain of the sequester on the Obama

administration while claiming all the credit for its effect

on reducing the deficit.

``Why is President Obama unnecessarily delaying your

flight?'' Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, wrote in a

message on Twitter. If the President wanted to, Republicans

said, he could easily cut somewhere else and spare travelers

any inconvenience.

As it happens, the sequester law is clear in requiring the

F.A.A. and most other agencies to cut their programs by an

even amount. That law was foisted on the public after

Republicans demanded spending cuts in exchange for raising

the debt ceiling in 2012. Since then, the party has rejected

every offer to replace the sequester with a more sensible mix

of cuts and revenue increases. Mr. Boehner is so proud of

that strategy that he recently congratulated his party for

sticking with the sequester and standing up to the

president's demand for tax increases.

But drastic cuts in spending carry a heavy price.

Republicans certainly don't want voters they care about--

including business travelers and those who can afford to fly

on vacation--to feel it. They continue to claim that the $85

billion in this year's sequester can be covered by

eliminating waste, fraud, consultants, and the inevitable

grant to some obscure science or art project. And of course

to programs for the poor.

You don't see any Republican hashtags blaming the president

for cutting housing vouchers to 140,000 low-income families,

which has begun. These vouchers are given by cities to

families on the brink of homelessness, and about half of them

go to families with children.

There aren't any tweets about the 70,000 Head Start slots

about to be eliminated, which is forcing some school

districts to distribute these valuable services by lottery.

This is not the editorial. The Presiding Officer's colleague, Senator Rockefeller--a wealthy man with this great name--as a young man went to West Virginia and fell in love with the poor because he was a VISTA volunteer, and he never left. He is now here in the Senate.

Let's get to the editorial. I am sorry about that.

Continuing:

Or about the cuts to Vista [Volunteers in Service to

America], which is hurting the program that performs

antipoverty work in many States. Or the 11 percent cut in

unemployment benefits for millions of jobless workers.

The voiceless people who are the most affected by these

cuts can't afford high-priced lobbyists to get them an

exception to the sequester, the way that the agriculture

lobby was able to fend off a furlough to meat inspectors,

which might have disrupted beef and poultry operations. And

what was cut in order to keep those inspectors on the job?

About $25 million from a program to provide free school

breakfasts.

As bad as the sequester was, it was being made worse by

these special-interest demands for exceptions, as well as

politically motivated attempts to deflect the responsibility

for pain.

The maneuvering shows the futility of trying to reduce the

deficit with crude and arbitrary cuts. Both Senate Democrats

and the White House have proposed budget plans that replace

the sequester with a much better mix of spending cuts and

revenue increases.

On Tuesday, the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid,

proposed replacing the sequester for 5 months with unspent

money from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is what one of America's major newspapers said today that millions of people will have the opportunity to read.

The sequester was designed as a tool to bring Democrats and Republicans together to reduce the deficit in a responsible way. By now we can all see that didn't work, and we can see that sequester's costs far outweigh the savings.

As indicated in this editorial, these across-the-board cuts would cost, this year, 750,000 jobs--three-quarters of a million jobs. They will cost us investments in education that keep America competitive. They will cost millions of

seniors, children, veterans, and needy families the safety net that keeps them from descending into poverty.

Most of the headlines are focused on the hours the sequester has cost travelers in airports across the Nation. The frustration and the economic effects of those delays should not be minimized.

The sequester could also cost this country, and humankind, a cure for AIDS, Parkinson's disease, or cancer. These arbitrary cuts have decimated funding for medical researchers seeking cures for diabetes, epilepsy, and hundreds of other dangerous and debilitating diseases.

The National Institutes of Health has delayed or halted vital scientific projects and reduced the number of grants it awards to research scientists. Thousands of research scientists will lose their jobs in the next few months. Research projects that can't go on without adequate staffing will be cancelled altogether. Ohio State University, which is known for more than a good football and basketball team, is also one of the premier research centers in America. Grants for cancer research and infectious disease control have been axed. They are over. At the University of Cincinnati, which is at the forefront in research on strokes--a leading cause of death in the United States--scientists are bracing for some more cuts. Vanderbilt University and the University of Kentucky are accepting fewer science graduate students because of funding reductions. At Wright State University, scientists researching pregnancy-related disorders, such as preeclampsia, will lose their jobs. Boston University has laid off lab scientists, and research laboratories in San Francisco have instituted hiring freezes and delayed the launch of important studies. Grants to some of Harvard University's most successful research scientists were not renewed because of the sequester.

The research I have talked about today--and these are only a few of them--saves lives and saves misery. These scientists are looking for the next successful treatment for Alzheimer's or the next drug to treat high cholesterol. They might never get the chance to complete their groundbreaking work or make their lifesaving discoveries because of these shortsighted cuts.

We have seen the devastating impacts of these arbitrary budget cuts. Now it is time to stop them.

Be prepared, everybody--the House is now working on another bill because we have the debt ceiling coming soon. They are working on another bill to make it even more painful for the American people.

Last night I introduced a bill that would roll back the sequester for the rest of the year, and just like the editorial indicated, it is something we should do. The bill would give Democrats and Republicans time to sit down at the negotiating table and work out an agreement to reduce the deficit in a balanced way. It wouldn't add a penny to the deficit. It would use the savings from winding down the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to prevent cuts that will harm our national security and our economy.

Before the Republicans dismiss these savings, they should recall that 235 Republicans voted to use these funds to pay for the Ryan Republican budget. They didn't consider it a gimmick when it served their own purposes.

We can stop the flight delays and the pink slips. We can stop the devastating cuts to programs that protect low-income children, homebound seniors, and homeless veterans. We can stop the cuts to crucial medical research. But Democrats can't do it without Republicans' help.

Republicans overwhelmingly voted for these painful, arbitrary cuts, and Republicans bear responsibility for their consequences. Remember, these cuts came about because of the debt ceiling they refused to move on until these devastating cuts came about, and Republicans bear responsibility for the consequences, from travel delays to cuts to vital programs. Now Republicans must accept that they have an obligation to cooperate with us to help stop these Draconian cuts and mitigate the consequences.